1 2025:CGHC:57803 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9654 of 2025 Sachin Lilhare S/o Pappu Lilhare, Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Bada Ashok Nagar, P.S. Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj (Thana Range Cyber Raipur), District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 79/2025, registered at Police Station Ganj District- Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that a complaint was received from the Superintendent of Police, Cyber Range Raipur, reporting that an amount of Rs.27,27,556/- was fraudulently transferred into 41 bank accounts of Karnataka Bank, Raipur Branch, through cyber-cheating. On this basis, Crime No. 79/2025 was registered at Police Station Ganj, Raipur under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) & 111 BNS, and RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 investigation commenced. During investigation, 19 accused persons including the present applicant have been arrested and sent to judicial custody. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated solely on the technical ground that his bank account was linked to the alleged fraudulent transactions. There is no material to show his conscious involvement, criminal intent, or any benefit derived from the alleged offence. Mere suspicion based on account linkage cannot substitute the legal requirement of proof, and no evidence demonstrates the requisite mens rea on his part. It is further submitted that the applicant did not know about any transaction is that the Dampi had been collected amount and cheat to the person, because the applicant’s mobile number was not connected in account number, due to this, the bank did not give any information about the said transaction. The applicant is in jail since 04.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the present case reflects a deeply organised cyber-fraud network wherein the applicant, Sachin Lilhare, has played a direct, deliberate, and indispensable role in facilitating large-scale financial frauds by allowing his bank account to be misused as a conduit for laundering crores of rupees obtained through cyber deception. The investigation has revealed that the applicant not only opened the Karnataka Bank account in his own 3 name but subsequently sold the entire bank account kit, including the SIM card registered for OTP authentication, to an unknown fraudster named Dumpy for a consideration of Rs.8,000/-, fully aware that the said account would be used for illegal transactions. The applicant’s bank account received an unusually high amount totalling Rs.94,94,689/- within a short span, and Rs.93,76,060/- was hastily withdrawn, leaving only Rs.1,18,629/-, thus clearly demonstrating laundering of proceeds of crime. Moreover, the applicant’s account has been flagged on the National Cybercrime Portal in a registered complaint where complainant Priya Rangnath directly linked her loss of Rs.46,941/- to fraudulent transactions routed through the applicant’s bank account. 5. Learned State counsel further submits that notably, despite issuance of notices under Section 35(3) and Section 94 BNSS for furnishing documents and cooperating with investigation, the applicant deliberately evaded compliance, withheld information, produced no documents, and failed to reveal the true identity or location of the person to whom he sold the bank account kit. His non-cooperation has severely hampered arrest of other accused persons in the chain. Given the nature of cyber-crimes, which require coordinated action and where the accused persons often destroy digital evidence, release of the applicant on bail at this stage poses a serious risk of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and enabling him to rejoin the cybercrime network. The applicant is directly connected with the flow of fraudulent funds and knowingly facilitated the concealment and enhancement of proceeds of crime. So far as the other co-accused are 4 concerned, their bail applications have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2025, 18.11.2025 and 30.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos.9149/2025, 9101/2025 and 7584/2025, respectively. Therefore, the bail application of the applicant is also liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, and in view of the incriminating material collected during investigation, the applicant’s active and conscious involvement in the offence stands clearly established. The applicant’s bank account was used as a primary channel for receiving and siphoning huge sums of money obtained through cyber-fraud, and the applicant has himself admitted to selling his bank account kit and registered mobile number for monetary gain, fully aware that it would be misused for illegal purposes. The enormous credits and abrupt withdrawals amounting to more than Rs.93 lakhs, the cyber-complaint directly linked to his account, his deliberate withholding of documents, repeated non-cooperation with investigating authorities, and his failure to disclose the identity of the co-accused to whom he handed over the bank account kit, all collectively demonstrate his conscious participation in the chain of cyber criminals. The magnitude of the fraud, continuing investigation, pending arrests of co-accused, and the applicant’s conduct showing clear attempts to evade responsibility and obstruct investigation, create a strong likelihood of him tampering with evidence or rejoining the cyber network if enlarged on bail. So far as the other co-accused are 5 concerned, their bail applications have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2025, 18.11.2025 and 30.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos.9149/2025, 9101/2025 and 7584/2025, respectively. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant - Sachin Lilhare, involved in Crime No. 79/2025, registered at Police Station Ganj District- Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of BNS, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded the trial expeditiously. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar